Solomon Furriers, Inc.

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF SOLOMON FURRIERS, IKC.

CONSE T ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLA non OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COYIMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-1155. Complaint, Jan. 1.67-Decision, Jan. 3, 1967 Consent order requiring an Albany, K. , retail furrier to CRase deceptively advertising, invoicing, and labeling its fur products. COMPLAIJ\T Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Solomon Furriers, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has violated the SOLOMON FURRIERS , INC.

Complaint provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows; PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent Solomon Furriers, Inc. , is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York.

Respondent is a retailer of fur products with its offce and principal place of business located at 64 South Pearl Street, city of Albany, State of New York.

PAR. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondent has been, and is now engaged in the introduction into commerce, and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution in commerce, of fur products; and has sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur products which have been made in whole or in part of furs which have been shipped and received in commerce as the terms "commerce iuy and !IfnI' product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act.

PAR. 3. Certain of said fur products ,were misbranded in violation of Section 4 (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were falsely and deceptively labeled or otherwise falsely and deceptively identified in that labels affxed to fur products, contained representations, either directly or by implication, that the prices of such fur products were reduced from respondent' former bona fide prices in the recent regular course of business and the amount of such purported reduction consUtuted savings to purchasers of respondent fur products. In truth and in fact the alleged former prices were false and deceptive in that they were not the actual, bona fide prices at which respondent offered the products to the public on a regular basis for a reasonably substantial period of time in the recent regular course of business. The said fur products were not reduced in price as represented, nor were savings afforded purchasers of respondent's fur products as represented.

PAR. 4. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto Complaint 71 F.

were fur products with labels which failed to show the true anima! name of the fur used in any such fur product PAR. 5. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not labeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: (a) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was .set forth on labels in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regula:ions. (b) The term "natural" was not used on labels to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, in violation pf Rule 19 (g) of said Rules and Regulations.

(c) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in handwriting on labels, in violation of Rule 29 (b) of said Rules and Regulations. (d) Information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set forth separately on labels with respect to each section of fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal furs, in violation of Rule 36 of said Rules and Regulations.

PAR. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by the respondent in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeiing Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under such Act. Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products covered by invoices which railed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in any such fur product.

2. To disclose that the fur contained in the fur p,' oducts was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artifjeially colored, when such was the fact.

3. To show the country of origin of imported furs used in fur products.

PAR. 7. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in vioiation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: (0) Information required under Section 5 (b) (I) of the Fur SOLOMON FCR!UERS, r:\c.

Complaint Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth on invoices in abbreviated form in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations. (b) The term " Persian Lamb" was not set forth on invoices in the manner required by law, in violation of Rule 8 of said Rules and Regulations.

(c) The term "Dyed Broadtail-processed Lamh" was not set forth on invoices in the manner required by law, in violation of Rule 10 of said Rules and Regulations.

(d) The term "natural" 'vas not used on invoices to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored, in violation of Rule 19 (g) of said Rules and Regulations.

(e) Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. PAR. 8. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced with respect to the name or designation uf the animal or animals that produced the fur from which the said fur products had been manufactured, in violation of Section 5 (b) (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products invoiced as "Broadtail" thereby implying that the furs contained therein were entitled to the designation "Broadtail Lamb" when in truth and in fact they were not entitled to such designation PAR. 9. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that certain advertisements intended to aid, promote and assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale and offering for sale of such fur products were not in accordance with the provisions of Section 5 (a) of the said Act.

Among and included in the aforesaid advertisements, but not Umited thereto, were advertisements of respondent which appeared in issues of the Times Vnion, a newspaper published in the city of Albany, State of 1\ ew York. Among such false and deceptive advertisements, but not limited thereto, were advertisements wll1ch failed to show that the fur contained in the fur product was bleached, dyed, or otherwise artificially colored, when such was the fad. PAR. 10. Respondent falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in violation of Section 5 (a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rule 44 (a) of the P.c'.Jes and Regulations promulgated thereunder by affxing labels thereto which represented :!:

Complaint 71 p.

either directly or by implication that the prices of such fur products were reduced from respondent's former bona fide prices in the recent regular COllrse of business and the amount of such purported reduction constituted savings to purchasers of respondent' s fur products. In truth and in fact, the alleged former prices were false and deceptive in that they were not the actual, bona fide prices at which the respondent offered the products to the public on a regular basis for a reasonably substantial period of time in the recent regular course of business. The said fur products were not reduced in prices as represented, nor ,were savings atf01' ded PUl'ChHSers of respondent's fur products as represented. PAR. 11. By means of the aforesaid advertisements and others of si:milar import and meaning not specifically referred to herein respondent fals,,))' and deceptively advertised fur products in violation of the Fur Produr:s Labeling Act in that said fur products were not advertised in tU'col'dance with the Rules and Regulations promulg' ated thereunder in the follmving respects: (a) Information required under Section is (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated tbereunder ;vas set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of the said Rules Rnd Regulations.

(b\ The term "naturai" wns not used to describe fur products which were not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or, otherwise artificially colored, in violab on of Rule 19 (g) of the said Rules alto Regulations.

(0) All parts of the Infol'lation required under Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder Wf re not set forth in type of equal size and conspicuousne13s and in close proximity with each other, in violation of Rule 38 (a) of the aforesaid Rules and Regulations. PAR. 1 2,. In actv rtising fur products for sale, as aforesaid, respondent made pricing claims and representations of the types covered by subsections (n), (b), (c) and (d) of ule 44 of the Rules and Rpg"ulations under the Fur Products Labeling Act. Respondent in making SECll claims Hnd representations failed to maintain full Hno adeuu2.te records disclosing the facts upon \which such clp.1rns Hih\ repre :entations ,were based, in violation of Rule 44(8) of said Euh:s 8.nd Regulations. PAR. IS. 'The afCl'fC;Sf1jd act,:, Hnd Pl' actices of respondent, as herein .8Jleg-,c " rlJ.'0 in viol1tion of th0 Fur Products Labeling Act Hllct tl10 :: promulgated thereunder and s ;\lld constHnb \'2 Dud practices and unfair riJlfsli' SOLOMON FURRIERS, INC.

Decision and Order methods of competition in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION A:-D ORDER The Federal Trade Commission having initiated an investigation of certain acts and practices of the respondent named in the caption hereof, and the respondent having been furnished thereafter with a copy of a draft of complaint which the Bureau of Textiles and Furs proposed to present to the Commission for its consideration and which, if issued by the Commission, would charge respondent with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act; and The respondent and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondent of alj the jurisdictional facts set forth in the aforesaid draft of complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by the respondent that the law has been violated as alleged in such complaint, ;,md waivers and provisions as required by the Commission s rules; and The Commission, having "reason to believe that the respondent has violated the Federal Trade Commission Act, and having determined that complaint should issue stating its charges in that respect, hereby issues its complaint, accepts said agreement makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the fol. lowing order:

1. Respondent Solomon Furriers, Inc. , is H corporation org n.. ized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, with its offce and. principal place of business located at 64 South Pearl Street, Albany, ::ew York. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the sllbject matter of this proceeding 1nd of the T9spondent, and the proceeding is in the public inte)'est ORDER It is o1'dcred That respondent Solomon Furriers, Inc. , a corporation, and its offcers, and respondent's representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device in connection vdth the introduction into comme.l' , or the sale advertising or offering for sa.le in commerce, or t.he b'ansporta," t.ion and distribution in commel' , of any fur product; or in con. nection with the sale, advertising, offering for sale. transportation Decision and Order 71 F. or distribution, of any fur product which is made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce as the terms "commerce fur" and "fur product" are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and desist from:

A. Misbranding fur products by:

1. Failing to affx labels to fur products showing in words and in figures plainly legible alj of the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Representing, directly or by implication on labels that any price whether accompanied or not by descriptive terminology is the respondent's former price of fur products when such price is in excess of the price at which such fur products have been sold or offered for sale in good faith by the respondent in the recent regular course of business, or otherwise Inisrepresenting the price at which such fm' products have been sold or offered for sale by respondent.

3. Misrepresenti!lg in any manner on labels or other means of identification the savings available to purchasers of respondent's fur products.

4. Setting forth information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form on labels arnxed to fur products.

5. Failing to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on labels ur.der the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored.

6. Setting forth information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in handwriting on labels affxed to fur products.

7. Failing to set forth separately on labels attached to fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal fur information required under Section 4 (2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder with respect to the fur comprising each section. SOLOMON Fr:RRIERS, INC.

Decision and Order B. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by: 1. Failing to furnish invoices, as the terrn "invoice is defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, showing in words and figures plainly legible aii the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. 2. Setting forth on invoices pertaining to fur products any false or deceptive information with respect to the name or designation of the animal or animals that produced the fur contained in such fur product. 3. Setting forth information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

4. Failing to set f01'th the term "Persian LHmb" in the manner required where an ejection is made to use that term instead of the word "Lamb.

5. Failing- to set forth the term "Dyed Bro"dtaiJprocessed Lamb" in the manner required where an election is made to use that term instead of the words "Dyed Lamb.

6. Failing to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed on invoices under the Fur Products Labeling Act and Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed, or otherwise artificially colored.

7. Failing to set forth on invoices the item number or mark assigned to each such fur product C. Falsely or deceptiveiy advertising fur products through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement or notice which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale of any fur product, and which:

1. Fails to set forth in words and figures plainly legible aii the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

2. Represents, directly or by implication, that any price, whether accompanied or not by descriptive termiIlOJogy is the respondent's former price of fur products when such price is in excess of the price at which such fur products have been sold or offered for sale in Syllabus 71 F.

good faith by the respondent in the recent regular course of business, or otherwise misrepresenting the price at which such fur products have been sold or offered for sale by respondent.

3. 1\1isrepresents in any manner the savings available to purchasers of respondent' s fur products. 4. Sets forth information required under Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

5. Fails to set forth the term "natural" as part of the information required to be disclosed in advertisements under the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe fur products which are not pointed, bleached, dyed, tip-dyed or otherwise artificially colored.

6. Fails to set forth all parts of the information required under Section 5 (a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in type of equal size and conspicuousness and in close proximity with each other.

D. Failing to maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which pricing claims and representations of the types described in subsections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the. Rule 44 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, are based. It is JUTther ordered That the respondent herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon it of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with this order.